Same evidence test in identifying causes of action

It is a settled rule that the application of the doctrine of res judicata to identical causes of action does not depend on the similarity or differences in the forms of the two actions. A party cannot, by varying the form of the action or by adopting a different method of presenting his case, escape the operation of the doctrine of res judicata.[1] The test of identity of causes of action rests on whether the same evidence would support and establish the former and the present causes of action.[2]

The Supreme Court held in Esperas v. The Court of Appeals[3] that the ultimate test in determining the presence of identity of cause of action is to consider whether the same evidence would support the cause of action in both the first and the second cases. Under the same evidence test, when the same evidence support and establish both the present and the former causes of action, there is likely an identity of causes of action.[4]

[1] Francisco v. de Bias, et al., 93 Phil. 1 (1953).
[2] Spouses Torres v. Medina, G.R. No. 166730, March 10, 2010.
[3] G.R. No. 121182, October 2, 2000, 341 SCRA 583, citing Bachrach Corporation v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, 357 Phil. 483 (1998).

[4] Spouses Antonio v. Sayman, G.R. No. 149624, September 29, 2010.